3 ms·
Much of that has been largely replaced with electronic media, and what remains is a “once in a while” occasion that people are willing to travel to. These days,
by philwelch 6y ago
Much of that has been largely replaced with electronic media, and what remains is a “once in a while” occasion that people are willing to travel to. These days, much of the time, city-dwellers are the ones who have to travel to suburban venues.
The main reasons for urbanization were always economic and political. Rome was not built for the Coliseum; the Coliseum was built for Rome.
- jschwartzi 6y agoThere are still a lot of us who really enjoy theater, opera, concerts, shows, and the like. And those things can only be had in a city. It's true that local amphitheaters may book a few good live acts every year but that selection pales in comparison to what you can get every weekend in a reasonably-sized city. There are some fun local theater groups in my suburb too. But sometimes I really want to watch something other than Shakespeare.
- philwelch 6y agoThat’s true. But since the mid-20th century, most people enjoy music, “dramatic productions” (for lack of a better generic term), and live sports electronically rather than in person. I know it’s not the same, and I also enjoy live entertainment and the other amenities of cities. I just don’t think these amenities are historically a prime driver for urbanization. People historically move to cities for economic reasons, providing a lucrative and competitive market for entertaining them.
- mmm_grayons 6y agoTrue, but that's not that common. And few people enjoy them so much as to live in the city for that reason alone.